How come people hate this movie? I thought it was way better than the other shitty Jurassic Park sequels.
>>69851214
Because it was a bland cash grab with no heart
>>69851214
Nope it was shit.
Jurassic 3 was way better than this
>>69851214
People? /tv/?
>>69851235
Nobody even remembers what 3 was about.
>>69851281
fuck off 3 had great scenes when they were running from their lives from practical effect dinosaurs.
None of this nowadays 100% cgi shit
>>69851281
Diehard on an island where the terrorists are dinosaurs and the detonators are eggs.
>>69851235
3 was poop. it even featured english speaking raptors
>>69851214
Being better than two shitty movies from the same franchise doesn't automatically make a movie good.
I only watched it recently, but I thought it was okay. The ending was fucking retarded though.
>>69851308
and this movie was more intelligent?
>opening a park which lets people control a vehicle themself by driving it around live dinosaurs instead of building a track so the vehicles would not interfere with the animals.
Whoever wrote the script for this is an absolute madman
>>69851338
> The ending was fucking retarded though.
Which part specifically? I was enjoying the battle royal till the Mosasaurus ate it.
>>69851338
>The ending was fucking retarded though.
the T Rex fight was the only good thing.
Chris Pratt was so mediocore and annoying to look at (a shame because I hear he actually is a good actor but I have only seen this movie of his so I don't mean to fully judge him).
Here's an idea, make a dinosaur theme park without any carnivores
>>69851214
That is because you have no consistent method of evaluating films. Jurassic World makes Jurassic Park III look like Jurassic Park.
>>69851426
>Jurassic World makes Jurassic Park III look like Jurassic Park.
Exactly what I meant with my comment here
>>69851235
I do not understand people who defend this bomb of a flick. It tried to be really edgy with killing off that aunt in the most brutal way (which made no sense at all), the Ball car's not on any tracks was the most retarded decision the script writers could make - believing that these professional people who opened this park thought it was a good idea for young kids to roam freely in the same area as moving dinosaurs.
>what if they accidentally bumped into a dinosaur and they became agressive?
>what if the kids accidentally went into a forbidden area?
Oh wait that actually happened... again the script writers are absolutely retarded for the way they wrote this movie.
It was really over the top and nonsensical.
Like even if you disregard the irex and trained raptors, every attraction they showed was extremely dangerous and unrealistic.
The mosasaurus could easy have flopped onto the crowd or broken the glass and killed people.
The petting zoo with kids riding baby dinosaurs that could easily bite them.
The gyrosphere ride that let's the rider drive wherever the fuck they want through herds of dinosaurs.
It's like a little kid who thinks the "plant eaters" are the friendly dinosaurs wrote the movie.
>>69851493
imagine the insurance costs.
considering what happened the last time.
>Gyrospheres that can be driven by children, with no automatic recall system? Alrighty then! You can expect a letter from our legal team.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/jurassic-world/questions-spoilers-mistakes/
>>69851378
Also the sphere is driving on its own windshield. Even it was scratch resistant there would be dirt and grass and shit smeared all over it, blocking your view after 2 minutes of driving.
>>69851214
More crying autistic children than animatronics and Product Placement™.
Essentially we finally saw a functioning park and looked like crowded misery.
it was dumb. i didn't hate it, though
Tell me I'm not the only one who cracked up when the first movie's theme plays and an establishing shot of the park appears but it's just a banal aerial view of a short street lined with stores and a tacky pyramid.
>>69851736
There were some moments like this where I really thought the movie was a self aware piece of shit. By the end though it's just a normal piece of shit
>>69851644
>Essentially we finally saw a functioning park and looked like crowded misery.
Like a real theme park.
>>69851590
also, how the fuck does that ride work? if people can drive their own balls however long they want, how does the line ever move forward?
>>69851378
Problem is you have to allow these stupid things in order for a movie like this work.
>>69851378
Did you miss the part where Jimmy Fallon shot that shit with a gun to prove how strong it was? Or the part where an Ankylosaurus tail managed to barely dent it? Also, the fact that the park was initially dangerous and not well designed is a theme that was present in the first movie as well as this one. Do people call out Jurassic Park for having a Jeep ride on only ONE track that passes by incredibly dense jungle? No, because that was the fucking point, the park was gonna suck, never mind the ethics involved. And the point here is that with such a chaotically run park, something horrible was bound to go wrong eventually, again, never mind the ethics of creating a new dinosaur from scratch for the sake of being scary. If retarded cunts can defend BvS for being "cape-kino" then I can at least pretend that JW upholds the themes from the first movie, even if it is mostly rehashing them.
>>69851975
JP1 was safe until it was intentionally sabotaged.
JW just had a huge disregard for basic safety protocols from the start.
>>69851235
ALAN!!!
World isn't bad because the park doesn't many any sense, it's bad because it's an ugly fucking movie without any critical awareness of its own story.
>>69851235
Yeah, no. 4 brought the Park itself back, 3 was another variation of The Lost World remake.
>A world where Jurassic Park [World] has finally become a reality, and they don't really spend a lot of time showing it in a meaningful way.
>What they do show is profoundly unrealistic. Not in the sense of living dinosaurs (which in the JP universe is relatively grounded), but health and safety and stuff.
>Mosasaur ex machina. Three times doing the same thing was excessive.
>Implying the world would ever get bored of a Dinosaur theme park to the point that necessitated creation of I-Rex.
>Pointless divorce sub-plot that went nowhere
>The death scene of that assistant was obscene in the context of the rest of the film. I was surprised at how uncomfortable it made me.
On the contrary I actually quite enjoyed the throwbacks to the original, even the return to the original visitor centre, as forced as it may have been. Then again, like Star Wars it relied too much on them.
>>69851214
>it was way better than the other shitty Jurassic Park sequels.
It was, marginally, but everybody hates those too. It embraced being a cynical cashgrab a bit too much for my taste. That T-Rex vs raptors vs whathissaurus final fight was JP3 ending levels of bad.
The only good thing to come out of those sequels was that one scene with the RV hanging from a cliff.
>>69851419
Danger = money.
One of the major plot points is the owner of the park asking for dinosaurs with 'more teeth' as a general way to say make more exciting dinosaurs.
Why do you think people love the Lions and Tigers at Zoos so much?
>>69852892
>One of the major plot points is the owner of the park asking for dinosaurs with 'more teeth' as a general way to say make more exciting dinosaurs.
So can we at least all agree that this was a not-so-sublte jab from the writers towards the producers, right?
>>69852958
If the rest of the writing in the movie is anything to go on, I have doubts that the writers were self aware or even savvy enough to do that.
5.5/10
it was (sort of) fun but whoever wrote the script for this needs to get their head examined
without bdh it would be forgettable shit-tier
>>69852790
>The death scene of that assistant was obscene in the context of the rest of the film. I was surprised at how uncomfortable it made me.
>secondary male character dies in the previous trilogy
>okay
>secondary female character dies in the new movie
>too far guys
>>69852334
The main theme of the movie is that no matter what the park would ultimately fail. Hammond says towards the end he'll try again, he'll hire more people, make the park less automated, but the very nature of the park prevents that from ever working. Chaos Theory, man.
>>69853230
I'm also surprised at how big of pussies people are being over that one death scene.
>>69853230
>secondary
She was a non-character
Why did they kill that assistant in such a big flashy and kinda mean way? I felt that was unnecessary.
>>69852996
It's not like it's particularly inventive writing, and using the technicians in charge of making things happening to criticize the higher-ups ideas seems pretty clear.
I'm fairly sure at least one of the writers was plenty aware of how dumb this script was.
>>69853298
She obviously had all of her scenes cut out, pretty much eliminating her character. There's a lot of characterisation and continuity that make no sense because they reference scenes that aren't in the movie.
>>69853284
There is a difference in that Jurassic World informs that the park has been functioning fine for a decade. Things only break when a 'bad' dinosaur is created, and harmony is restored when the 'good' dinosaurs team up to defeat the flaw. It's nothing like the message of Jurassic Park.
>>69853379
The death scene made me feel like they wanted me to be glad she was dead, like I was supposed to hate the character, but I didn't know her. She had like 5 lines.
>>69851378
this is really a flaw, but I tend to agree with>>69851338
and>>69851234
although I enjoyed the sequel. The 3rd was obviously subpar but I stll liked it because I watched it with friends (and the outcome of the pterodactyl attack was grim).
I watched it recently too and thought that it had some of the nostalgia value, but thehighgrass chase was a ripoff from the 2nd. SOme might say that the dinosaur whisperer was over the top, but was it really? It was straight from Spielberg magic, made believable through the use of the special whistle and besides, he wasn't totally in control like some kind of all powerful magician.
also>you 're looking at him kid
>>69853441
>harmony is restored when the 'good' dinosaurs team up to defeat the flaw
God I hate that they basically turned the T-Rex and raptors into good guys because they're the flagship dinosaurs of the original.
That was so fucking gay.
>>69851214
>hate
People think it's mediocre and had too much CGI.
And that's about right; some parts were breddy gud but by and large it was meh.
>>69853526
Tell me about it. I remember having nightmares about the Rex and the raptors twenty fucking years ago after I saw JP for the first time (sneaked downstairs when my parents were watching it on VHS) and they still show up if something gives me a nightmare.
>>69854519
it pissed me off how the raptors go to kill the monster dino or whatever, then are like, "oh whatsup your part raptor? alright fuck that guy then". then a few scenes later they just go, "oh nm we are back with him now" and try to kill the monster dino. It was so fucking overboard. They almost made the trained raptors believable before that nonsense.
And before anyone gets on me about "believable" I did say almost
>>69854846
no, that's a good point you 're making
The movie set a record in downright baffling stupidity and illogical storytelling. Nothing made any sense, and the character development was at a zero, or even negative level.
That being said, it was still entertaining and i enjoyed it. Good action. Even got the dvd, whatever.
>>69851299
But the animatronics in JP3 were fucking sci-fi channel original movie tier, you fucking 15 year old.
>>69851606
ITT: kids who've never waxed their car before, or owned one
>>69852790
>Pointless divorce sub-plot
It was the brothers' arc. Even though their parents were divorcing, they would still be brothers, lad. This is generic blockbuster 101 how did you miss that.
>>69851281
Only reason why people remember JW is about is because it follows the same beats as the the original film.That said, I really thought JW was fun and and not a bunch of boring assholes walking through the woods like the other sequels.
JP: 8/10
TLW: 7/10
JP3: 4/10
JW: 7/10
and because why not
Hope: 8/10
Empire: 8/10
Jedi: 6/10
TPM: 3/10
AotC: 3/10
Sith: 5/10
TFA: 4/10
Although TMP and AotC were way more entertaining albeit worse written than TFA but were definitely worse in quality in general. TFA and JP3 definitely are tied as far as franchise rape goes, though.
>>69855207
Chris Pratt and BDH were both great fun but they couldn't save the movie from everything else.
What were the flaws of this movie again? I sincerely forget. I thought it was great.
>>69851214
Jewrassic World is a capeflick that pretends to be JP, on top of that it ripped off too much stuff from the previous flicks. Literally a nostalgia cashgrab with no shred of creativity. I-rex is literally Spinosaurus 2.0. They even stole THE SHOTS from the other JP's, that is extremely shameful.
The acting and cinematography is the most awful too among the three, they create zero tense. The plot is decent, but holy shit, how the fuck did they hand over the script to some incompetent indie director?
>>69855314
JP: 9.5/10
Lost World: 8.5/10
JP3: 7.5/10
JW: 3/10, not even trying
>>69855681
Completely disagree. JP3 is a piece of shit. I wish we could watch it together. I bet we would become friends.
>>69855711
>JP3 is a piece of shit.
A really memorable piece of shit that was made with heart. I honestly remember the scenes more fondly than TLW.
>>69851281
ALAN
>>69855780
The Lost Word is not very good.
>>69855780
>ALAN
>TH-THAT'S COOPER!
>T-Rex jobbed off
>cancerous practical "effects"
>William H. phoning it in
>literally no climax, just an egg handoff
what even happened in this movie?
>>69855884
>Haha, a dream sequence is weird, I don't like practical effects, why is this movie so confusing!!?
This is you, re-evaluate your life.
>>69855884
>T-Rex jobbed off
That fight was real, the slammed the two robots together and the T-rex animatronic really got it's neck finished off by Spino animatronic. They had no choice but to make the t-rex die.
>cancerous practical "effects"
Fuck you, they looked great. JW on the other hand...
>>69851493
>what if they accidentally bumped into a dinosaur and they became agressive?
That's why they were durable.
Just because the Indominus Rex could break them doesn't mean the dinos they were specfically meant for could.
>what if the kids accidentally went into a forbidden area?
It's almost as if there were fuckhuge fences all over the fucking island.
Jurassic World was mediocre, but those two complaints you made are pretty retarded, because the movie goes out of its way to fucking explain WHY.
>>69852790
>Implying the world would ever get bored of a Dinosaur theme park to the point that necessitated creation of I-Rex.
Implying the world wouldn't get bored of a Dinosaur theme park
That's literally the reason there's new rides in amusement parks every year.
Because people get bored of the old rides.
You might think you'd never get bored of a Dinosaur theme park, but visit it enough times and you will.
>>69852606
DR. GRANT?
To those who hated this movie: What the fuck were you expecting? Another masterpiece like Jurassic Park? It was a good entertaining movie and if you didn't like it you have only yourself to blame for having too high standards.
